EP1451034B1 - Method for controlling an adjuster on a motor vehicle - Google Patents

Abstract

A method for controlling a vehicle seat adjuster in an adjusting path having a first mechanical stop and a second mechanical stop. A user sets an adjustment position of the adjuster inside the adjusting path. A protective stop is also automatically set in the adjusting path in the vicinity of the mechanical stops or another mechanical block blocking the adjusting path. The protective stop causes the adjusting motion to be reduced or stopped upon reaching of the protective stop. This helps produce a smooth braking of the vehicle seat and reduces the mechanical strain on the mechanical stops. The protective stop may be corrected with an updated protective stop. The updated protective stop is maintained despite any user action if a condition dependent on the adjusting motion of the adjuster is fulfilled. Learning regions within the adjusting path are provided to allow the setting of updated protective stops within the learning regions.

Description

The invention relates to a method for controlling an adjusting device of a motor vehicle, in particular a motor vehicle seat adjustment.

Such a method relates in particular to the control of an adjusting device, which has at least one adjusting path between a first stop and a second stop and in which a user action is used to set an adjusting position of the adjusting device within the adjusting path. In this case, the respective adjustment position within the adjustment path is determined (by means known per se for position detection) and an (electrically acting) protective stop is set in the adjustment path which, depending on the adjustment position, automatically reduces the adjustment energy, in particular stopping the adjustment movement in the range of a mechanical blocking of the adjusting movement. The mechanical blocking can be triggered on the one hand by one of the two stops at the limits of the adjustment or on the other hand by an obstacle located in the adjustment, such as a parked behind the motor vehicle seat crate.

A user action here means an operation of an actuating device of the adjusting device by the person located on the corresponding motor vehicle seat with which the adjusting position of the motor vehicle seat or of a part of the motor vehicle seat to be adjusted can be changed. An electrically acting protective stop is understood to be a protective stop which is not covered by a protective stop mechanical stop is formed, but rather acts electrically on the adjusting movement of the adjusting device to decelerate this.

Previous control methods for adjusting devices of motor vehicles use a direct measuring system for determining the adjustment position of a motor vehicle seat. For this purpose, a potentiometer detects the respective current adjustment position along an adjustment path. Each adjustment position is assigned a resistance value. Due to the direct coupling between the resistance value and the adjustment movement, no errors occur between the measured position and the real adjustment position if the measured value can be read out without error from the potentiometer.

Due to the high wear of potentiometers for position measurement and the additional wiring required increasingly path detection systems are used to control vehicle seat adjustments, which detect the rotational drive movement of the drive motor for determining the position. For this purpose, for example, the motor current is evaluated or detects the drive movement by means of sensors. Especially Hall sensors can be used for such detection. However, this type of indirect measurement of the adjustment position by the detection of the drive movement leads to measurement errors due to inaccuracies between the detected position and the real adjustment position, which may differ substantially from each other. These inaccuracies can be remedied programmatically only partially. If an adjusting device of a motor vehicle seat is actuated several times, for example because of frequent driver changes, this can lead to significant position errors.

The previously described position detection systems for motor vehicle adjustment devices are used for the controlled approach of previously stored memory positions that can be configured in an adjustment path between a first mechanical stop and a second mechanical stop. For configuration is exploited that by means of one of the aforementioned position detection system, the adjustment is determined within the adjustment.

In addition to this comfort function, a protective stop is set in the adjustment path in the area of a mechanical stop in order to reduce the mechanical load on the adjustment system. The protective stop allows depending on the specific adjustment an automatic reduction of the adjustment. These Reduction enables a gentle braking of the adjustment movement. Ideally, the adjustable part of the adjusting device just does not reach the stop. In order to ensure this also taking into account further factors or tolerances, the drive motor is electronically braked or switched off, for example, in the area of the protective stop, which leads to a stopping of the adjusting movement of the adjusting device in the area of this protective stop.

The above-described significant positional errors also cause a shift in the positions of the protective stops from or to the real mechanical stops whose position remains fixed relative to the displacement. An unfavorable shift of the protective stops with increasing distance from the mechanical distances would lead to a significant limitation of the adjustment when the protective stops should prevent overrunning, for example by inertial force, in the direction of the mechanical stops for stress reasons.

From US-PS 5,081,586 it is known to set in the adjustment of a motor vehicle adjustment a protective stop that can be overridden by a user action by the user when reaching the protective stop actuates a corresponding switch. As a result, there is the problem that by such user actions a repeated hard starting of the adjustment limit limiting mechanical stops can be done with a corresponding load on the adjustment.

From US-PS 4,881,020 it is known to set stops in a seat adjustment when opening and closing the vehicle door (corresponding to an entry or exit of the driver).

The invention is based on the problem to provide a method for controlling an adjustment of a motor vehicle, which reduces the mechanical load of the adjustment of the adjustment by reducing the number of adjustments in the mechanical stop, without the available adjustment by the method significantly is restricted.

This problem is solved by a method for controlling an adjusting device of a motor vehicle, in particular a motor vehicle seat adjustment, with the features of claim 1. Advantageous developments of the invention can be found in the dependent claims.

Thereafter, a new, not ineffective switchable by the user action protective stop is set to correct the position of the protective stop when a dependent of the adjustment of the adjustment condition is met.

Under a non-ineffectively switchable by a user action protective stop is understood to mean a stop that - regardless of a possible user action - causes a reduction of Verstellergie with the goal of slowing down or stopping the adjustment if the adjustment corresponds to the position of the protective stop. Consequently, it is not possible for the user to overrun the protective stop by operating an actuating device associated with the adjusting device. Thus, the user can not act on the protective stop directly via the actuating device of the adjusting device and switch it ineffective, that is to say that the adjusting movement continues unaltered independently of a possible user action.

The invention is based on the finding that a non-ineffectively switchable by the user protection stop to reduce the mechanical load of the adjustment can be used without restricting the available for the user adjustment too strong, if certain when setting this protective stops dependent on the adjustment Conditions are met that prevent a non-override (not ineffective switchable) protective stop is set at a location that led to an unnecessary limitation of the adjustment.

The protective stop is preferably an electrically acting protective stop, which effects an automatic reduction of the adjustment energy if, during the adjusting movement, an adjustment position is reached which corresponds to the position of the protective stop.

In a preferred embodiment of the invention, the protective stop can be ineffective only by an evaluation logic, which continuously monitors and evaluates the adjustment of the adjustment, in particular based on the history of the individual Verstellereignisse. The adjusting events may in particular be a stopping of the adjusting movement (eg due to a protective stop or when one of the mechanical stops or another blockage) is being acted on and / or the beginning of an adjustment movement (approach of the adjustment) or a change of direction of the adjustment.

The ineffective switching of the protective stop by means of the evaluation logic takes place in particular for the purpose of setting a new protective stop, ie to correct the position of the protective stop. The conditions which have to be fulfilled for a correction of the position of the protective stop can relate in particular to the location, the time and the number of the aforementioned adjusting events.

A protective stop preferably has a position parameter which assigns the effect intended by the protective stop to a specific adjustment position. Furthermore, the protective stop preferably has an effect parameter which assigns the functionality of the protective stop associated with the desired effect to the same. A desired effect is, for example, the reduction of the adjustment energy in the direction of the previously detected blocking. While in the opposite direction, ie in the direction of increasing distance from the blocking, the adjustment energy is preferably not reduced. Different function modes or modes of action can be assigned to different adjustment modes. For example, in a normalization mode, after the stop due to the protective stop, a low adjustment speed can be traversed in one of the stops in order to re-normalize the current adjustment position.

The protective stop is thus intended in particular to bring about a stopping of the adjusting movement in the region of one of the stops.

According to one aspect of the invention, in addition to the setting of the protective stop, a learning range assigned to this protective stop is determined. This assignment serves to establish an active relationship between this protective stop and the learning area. The learning area controls the local boundary conditions for teaching in a new protective stop, such that a setting of a protective stop is permitted within this learning area, this newly set protective stop being assigned to the respective stop and thus enabling a reduction in the adjustment energy in the direction of the stop. The admission of setting a protective stop means that setting a relevant new protective stop in this area can still depend on further criteria, but takes place locally between the area limits of this learning area, to the exclusion of negative further criteria.

A new protective stop is set if there is a need to correct the value of the previous protective stop. For example, the count is shifted substantially over the real position of the mechanical stop, so that the previous position of the protective stop does not ensure a sufficient reduction of the adjustment before the displaced part touches the stop. If there are expected shifts within the training range limits, the procedure is as described above. If the position value of the protective stop, the stop or a value correlating therewith is outside this learning range, no protective stop assigned to this stop is set. However, other measures may be taken or other protective stops not assigned to this stop may be set.

To determine the learning range, the range limits of the learning range are determined as a function of a position characteristic. In particular, this position characteristic is the position of the associated stop itself, so that the limits of the learning range of this position of the stop are easy to calculate and low in tolerance. Alternatively, other positional characteristics, such as a detection of a particular displacement position by means of a position detector, can be used to calculate the range limits. The width of the Einlembereiches, for example, 20 mm, is calculated in dependence on the position of the stop such that during normal operation of the motor vehicle adjustment a displacement between the determined position and real adjustment position is generally smaller than the width of Einlembereichs. The control process can then deviate from this response to larger, unexpected shifts.

In an advantageous embodiment of the invention, a blocking of the adjustment movement is determined at one of the stops for determining the Einlembereiches, and the range limits of the learning range are calculated in dependence on the adjustment position associated with the blocking of the adjustment. Alternatively, a guard stop can also be used for the position calculation. Advantageously, the range limits are calculated such that the blocking position is at or within the range limits.

An advantageous development of the invention provides that the first mechanical stop a first Einlembereich and the second mechanical stop is associated with a second teaching area, and between the first teaching area and the second Einlembereich a blocking area is provided. This blocking area in turn serves as local boundary condition for the setting of a protective stop, such that the setting of a new protective stop assigned to the mechanical stop is prevented in the blocking area.

According to an advantageous embodiment of this development of the invention, at least one of the set protective stops is deactivated when a blocking of the adjusting movement is determined within the blocking area. The deactivation causes this previous protective stop can be run over in the direction of the associated mechanical stop, so the adjustment energy is not automatically reduced. However, if a blockage within the teach-in area is subsequently recognized subsequently, the protective stop can be reactivated and also repositioned.

If an adjustment position is determined outside of the previous teach-in areas and the blocking area, in an advantageous development of the invention all teaching-in areas and set protective stops are deactivated. This causes the setting of a new guard stop, which is assigned to a mechanical stop, to be spatially independent, since no teach-in areas are active. If a blockage at a mechanical stop is detected, a protective stop is set and the associated single-range range is calculated in a computing unit and both stored non-volatilely.

An advantageous development of the invention provides that the distance between a first protective stop of the associated first mechanical stop and a second protective stop of the associated second mechanical stop is compared with a minimum distance. The minimum distance is read from a memory. The minimum distance is given as empirical value and can be, for example, 80 percent of the desired adjustment or the minimum distance is calculated from undisturbed adjustments in the two stops during the tape end assembly of the motor vehicle from the distance of the two stops.

If the distance is equal to or less than the minimum distance, advantageously at least one of the protective stops is changed, in particular shifted or deactivated. For larger positional errors occurring, it is advantageous that both protective stops and the associated Einlembereiche be disabled when the distance is equal to or less than the minimum distance. In this way, the adjustment system, in particular the Protective stops, re-normalized if the blocking is detected by one of the stops.

In an advantageous embodiment of the invention, the adjustment speed is reduced at least within the Einlembereiche. If no protective stops are set, the blocking state of the adjustment system at one of the stops takes place with a high probability, which causes a high mechanical load on the adjustment system. To reduce this, the force applied to the stop is substantially reduced by the speed reduction.

Advantageously, a second position of the second mechanical stop associated with the second mechanical stop is determined as a function of the determination of a first position of the first protective stop assigned to the first mechanical stop. This is achieved in a preferred embodiment of the invention in that the adjustment is mapped to a virtual position axis. The position of the first protective stop and the position of the second protective stop position-dependent from the first protective stop are fixedly arranged on this virtual positional axis. The current adjustment position of the adjusting device between the stops is assigned to a position value on the virtual position axis, this virtual position axis being aligned with the adjustment path, preferably with the stops, if a displacement of the virtual position axis relative to the adjustment path is determined.

Consequently, the positions of the two protective stops are always in a fixed local relationship to each other, for example, have a fixed distance from each other. With the displacement of the position value on the virtual axis, the position value is preferably also shifted to the protective stops, the protective stops remaining stationary on the virtual axis for this purpose.

In addition to setting, in particular, the first protective stop, a teaching range assigned to this protective stop is determined. This assignment serves to establish an active relationship between this protective stop and the learning area. The teach-in area controls the local boundary conditions for training a new protective stop, such that within this Einlembereichs setting a protective stop is allowed, this newly set protective stop is assigned to the respective stop and thus allows in the direction of the stop a reduction of the adjustment. The admission of setting a protective stop means that setting a relevant new protective stop in this area can still depend on further criteria, but locally between the range limits of this learning range, excluding negative further criteria.

A new protective stop is set if there is a need to correct the value of the previous protective stop. For example, the count is shifted substantially over the real position of the mechanical stop, so that the previous position of the protective stop does not ensure a sufficient reduction of the adjustment before the displaced part touches the stop. If there are expected shifts within the training range limits, the procedure is as described above. If the position value of the protective stop, the stop or a value correlating therewith is outside this learning range, no protective stop assigned to this stop is set. However, other measures may be taken or other protective stops not assigned to this stop or protective stops inutilizable by a user may be set.

For the determination and further embodiments of the Einlembereiches reference is made to the description of DE 101 59 136.

In an alternative development of the invention, the error of the position of this protective stop is determined in the case of a correction need for the position of one of the protective stops. Subsequently or at the same time the desired position of this protective stop is determined and corrected. Depending on this current position, the position of the other protective stop associated with the other stop is determined and corrected. In this variant of the invention, the positions of both protective stops are corrected in relation to each other. This ratio is preferably a fixed distance or in an alternative embodiment of the invention, a minimum distance, which can also be exceeded, for example, to take into account a settlement behavior of the adjustment with. This minimum distance between the first protective stop and the second protective stop can be specified or determined. The determination can be made, for example, depending on the measurement of a normalization run.

For the use of a virtual axis, the adjustment position is preferably assigned to a position value which is changed for assignment as a function of the adjustment of the adjustment device. Although this assignment is not limited to the application of a virtual axis, it can be used particularly advantageously for this purpose. The position value is corrected if a shift of the position value to the current one Adjustment position is determined. For correction, the current position value is changed relative to the position of at least one protective stop to this current adjustment position. The protective stops, however, can remain stationary. For this purpose, the protective stop positions are advantageously stored non-volatilely as values that are invariable for the correction. For correction, the current position value is set to this current adjustment position, wherein the position value is changed relative to the mutually dependent positions of the first guard stop and the second guard stop.

For the assignment of the adjustment position to the position value, the position value in an advantageous embodiment of the invention is a count value which is incremented or decremented in dependence on the drive movement of a drive of the adjustment device. For this purpose, for example, Hall sensors or ripple-count measuring methods can be used.

In order to correct the position value, the current position value is calculated or read from a register of a memory as a function of an adjustment position associated with blocking the adjustment movement so that the first protective stop in the region of the first mechanical stop and the second protective stop in the region of the second mechanical stop is positioned.

In an advantageous embodiment of the invention, at least one of the protective stops is deactivated when a shift of the position value to the current mechanical adjustment position in the adjustment path is determined. The displacement of the virtual position axis to the adjustment path is preferably calculated as a function of an adjustment position associated with the blocking of the adjustment movement, so that the first protective stop is positioned in the region of the first mechanical stop and the second protective stop in the region of the second mechanical stop. Before such a correction, at least one of the protective stops is advantageously deactivated immediately if a shift of the virtual position axis to the adjustment path is determined.

In an advantageous development of the invention, a first learning area is associated with the first mechanical stop and a second learning area is associated with the second mechanical stop. Between the first Einlembereich and the second Einlembereich a blocking area is provided. At least one of the protective stops is deactivated if, within the blocking area, a blocking of the adjusting movement is determined. Advantageously, the range limits of the learning ranges are stored as fixed positions and to the respective protective stop position in a fixed relation.

According to another aspect of the invention, in case of detection of the mechanical blocking, a protection stop ineffective by a user action is set. The mechanical blockage is detected, for example, by a stoppage of the drive axle of the adjusting drive. For detection, in addition to the previously mentioned example, all the sensations of movements, forces, currents or the like can be used, which enable a distinction between an adjustment movement and a blocking. In the case of this mechanical blockage detection, a protective stop is placed in the displacement that is positioned locally to the blockage. This protection stop has the functionality that the same can be switched ineffective by a user action. The user action is an action, for example, an actuation of an operating device, the person who wants to adjust the adjustment in the position. This is, for example, the driver of a motor vehicle who wants to adjust the vehicle seat in the seat longitudinal direction.

If the protective stop is switched by the user ineffective, this has the consequence that the effect of the protective stop is at least temporarily canceled. In particular, after a stopping of the adjusting movement which has been stopped by the protective stop, a block for a further method in the same adjusting direction is canceled when the protective stop is switched ineffective by the user. In addition to the simple switching on and off the effect of the protective stop for the protection of the mechanism, ie in particular the blocking of the adjustment in the blocking, switching of various modes of the protective stop can also be done, but at least temporarily cancel the blocking effect and thus the protective stop in its blocking effect switch ineffective in the direction of blocking. This can be carried out, for example, as "overpressure" by a renewed actuation by the user in the same adjustment direction, ie in the direction of blocking, after the protective stop-related stopping leads to a new adjustment movement, which is limited for example by the blocking.

This ineffective switchable protective stop is replaced by a protective stop independent of this user action if a condition that depends on the adjusting movement is fulfilled. The protection stop independent of the user action prevents the Lifting the blocking by the user, so that a conditional by a user action method of the adjustment in the blocking is not possible. Consequently, the protective stops previously executed differ in function mode with regard to the authorized or unauthorized user action.

The method is advantageously applicable for controlling an adjusting device of a motor vehicle, in particular a motor vehicle seat adjustment with an adjustment path between a first mechanical stop and a second mechanical stop. Furthermore, it is necessary that an adjustment position is determined within the Verstellweges to assign the protective stops this adjustment position and to achieve a local dependence of the effects of these protective stops.

The replacement of the switchable protective stop by the independent protective stop is subject to the condition that depends on the adjusting movement. These conditions are, in particular, plausibility checks which are intended to minimize undesired restriction of the travel path. In order to enable as far as possible an adjustment movement, the fulfillment of this condition, which can also be composed of several combined conditions, is checked, in particular by means of an algorithm.

The various types of conditions are subdivided according to the sub-tasks of the invention into several main variants, which can advantageously be combined with one another as components of the condition.

The invention is intended to make it possible to check the condition of adjusting positions that are particularly characteristic of the adjusting movement. For this purpose, in a further developing main variant of the invention, the condition of an adjustment in one of the attacks depends. In this case, the stops have both a significant adjustment position, whereby the adjustment possibility is limited in one direction, as well as a significant adjustment characteristic due to a deceleration of the adjustment movement in a method in the attacks on.

In order to obtain a maximum adjustment path, the positions of the stops limiting the adjustment are preferably determined. In particular, if these can be recognized only by their relative position to each other, the position of the blocking in the adjustment opposite stop is determined in an advantageous development of this main variant as a condition. Are both Positions are known from local dependencies, for example, from the relative position to each other or the position of the blocks to certain Einlembereichen, the blockage at both stops are closed. The condition for replacing the ineffective switchable protective stop with the protective stop independent of the user action is fulfilled in this case. The order of whether first the opposite stop or the stop associated with the current block is protected with an independent protective stop is arbitrary.

Alternatively or in combination for evaluating the local dependencies of the blocking, the adjustment characteristic can also be used on a block for the condition. For this purpose, the course of an adjustment variable is evaluated in an advantageous variant of the invention for blocking. The adjustment variable is, for example, the instantaneous speed, the acceleration or a control parameter of a speed control whose course is evaluated over time or over the path. Advantageously, as a condition of this course associated with a characteristic of a stop course of the adjustment. This assignment can be solved for example by means of convolution or another mathematical algorithm that outputs a comparison result of the comparison of at least two courses.

As an alternative to this variant, the blockage at one of the stops can be sensed using additional hardware as a condition. For this purpose, the stop or the part to be moved of the adjusting device on a sensor which detects the impact forces. Obstacles in the adjustment path, however, can not affect this sensor.

In addition, it should be ensured that deviations from the optimal adjustment do not affect the result of this condition check. In an advantageous further variant of the invention, therefore, the inaccuracy of the determined adjustment position is determined for the plausibility check of the condition. The inaccuracy can be caused by different external or system immanent influences. This inaccuracy can already significantly influence the validity of the result of the condition because of error probabilities. Advantageously, the uncertainty may not exceed a maximum value as a condition. This maximum value ensures that the travel restriction is limited to a still tolerable level.

In an advantageous embodiment of the invention, a number of adjustments is determined as a measured value for the inaccuracy. For this purpose, for example, the number of operations by the user can be counted. Due to the error caused by the adjustment of the adjustment position at a start or deceleration of the adjustment, this count can be used as a measure of probable inaccuracies. Advantageously, the exceeding of the number of adjustments over a maximum value is checked as a condition. If this maximum value is exceeded, the condition is not fulfilled, and as a result the ineffective switchable protective stop is not replaced by a protective stop independent of the user action.

Furthermore, it is particularly advantageous that the inaccuracy is determined by a number of changes in direction of the adjustment. Due to elastic deformations of the drive mechanism of the adjusting device, this drive mechanism is biased by the one in the opposite direction at a change of direction of the adjustment. These additional spring travel leads to significant errors in the determination of the adjustment position, which in turn can cause errors in the location-dependent positioning of the independent protective stops. Consequently, it is advantageously evaluated that the number of changes in direction of the adjustment does not exceed a maximum value as a condition.

Furthermore, errors in the evaluation itself, which are caused by the electronics, can lead to an incorrect positioning of the protective stop and consequently to an undesired travel restriction. In an advantageous embodiment of the invention, these errors of the electronics are checked as a condition by in particular the inaccuracy is determined by the determination of a detected break in the supply voltage of the adjusting device. For this purpose, the collapse of the supply voltage is advantageously not detected during an adjustment as a condition. Such a collapse of the supply voltage could cause, for example, a faulty detection of the adjustment position by a lag of the adjusting device during the break-in. Further errors of the electronics are, for example, incorrect storage of the adjustment position or an error in the program sequence of a processor.

Is a normalization in the attacks undesirable, because the caused by the normalization in the attacks mechanical stress of the adjustment is to be further reduced, are advantageously used individually or in combination with the Stops evaluated further dependent on the adjustment conditions. In a further main variant of the invention, a condition independent of a blocking adjustment position in the adjustment path between the stops is sensed as a condition. For this purpose, sensors must be provided which detect a one-to-one adjustment position within the adjustment path for normalization. This detection is used to normalize the specific adjustment position. On the other hand, a maximum deviation between the specific adjustment position and the normalization position can be used as a condition.

If further functions, in particular for the protection of the vehicle occupants, are available, in an advantageous further variant of the invention a pinching of objects or persons by the adjusting device of the motor vehicle is detected by means of a pinching detector. This detection of a trapping case is advantageously used to check the validity of the detection of the blockage at one of the stops by means of the condition. For this purpose, no jamming has been detected as a condition prior to replacement.

If the adjustment can be adjusted so that no object or body of a vehicle occupant is in the adjustment this is advantageously additionally evaluated. According to a further variant of the invention, the adjusting device is operated in different operating modes. In this case, the adjusting device is operable in a normalization mode, which can be used for example in a workshop or during a locked state of the motor vehicle. In this case, the blockage at the stops takes place as a condition dependent on these adjustment conditions in this normalization mode. Blocking on another object can be excluded in this normalization mode.

To replace the protective stop the user will be determined in the simplest possible way, whether the protective stop should be switched ineffective and therefore should be carried out an adjustment beyond this protective stop. According to one embodiment of the invention, the user's will is determined based on the operation of an operating device. Advantageously, the user action corresponding to the user will be carried out by the manual operation of an operating device for controlling the adjusting device. This operating device consists for example of switches, which can be used to control the adjustments of the individual adjustment of a seat adjustment. If the operating device is actuated again by means of this user action, the adjusting device is moved beyond the protective stop. Is the Blocking previously caused for example by a banana box, which was already removed at the time of user action from the adjustment, the user action, the adjustment on this protective stop addition, ideally done to the limiting stop. In this case, the previous ineffective switchable protective stop can be disabled or deleted, since the assumption of blocking by the banana box no longer applies. The deletion or deactivation takes place, for example, depending on the user action.

Advantageously, the number of actuation events is checked. The user action is preferably carried out by the renewed manual actuation of the actuating element of the operating device associated with the adjustment movement direction after setting the protective stop which can be switched without effect. If the user's will is determined that the set ineffective switchable protective stop should be run over, analysis of the user action allows a method beyond the protective stop without or alternatively with a stop at the desired position. In this respect, it can be concluded on the user's will that a continuation of the adjustment in the direction of blocking by the user is desired after a protective stop-related stopping the adjustment. For example, an additional key may be provided, which allows a method without stopping at the ineffective switchable protective stop.

If an accidental re-actuation or an incorrect operation preclude a method of the adjustment in the detected blocking, in an advantageous embodiment of the invention, the user action by the manual operation of a release operation element. This release actuation element may be, for example, an additional switch or a combined actuation of a plurality of buttons, which enable at least one further activation in a double function. This release actuation element is actuated, for example, before a method beyond the protective stop as a user action, and the blocking in the direction of the detected blocking is canceled.

In order to be able to influence the user's intention, it is provided in an advantageous development of the invention that the user action takes place interactively by means of an input unit and an output unit between the adjusting device and the user. As a result, information about the state of the adjustment system can be communicated to the user and the user can, for example, remove obstacles in the travel path in order to enable re-normalization of the attacks.

Since a protective stop has at least one assignment to an adjustment position and a further assignment to a desired effect, different variants are possible for the replacement of the ineffective switchable protective stop by the protective stop independent of the user action. Both variants of the invention set forth below have in common that at most one of the two protective stops is active. As an alternative, both protective stops can also be active, wherein the adjustment energy is already reduced when one of the two active protective stops is reached.

A variant of this development of the invention provides that for the replacement of the ineffective switchable protective stop by the user action independent protective stop this protective stop is changed from ineffective switchable to the user action protective stop. In contrast, a change in the adjustment position is not absolutely necessary if absolute normalization is not necessary. However, normalization can be advantageous in order to simplify the assignment of the positions from the memory position to the adjustment position.

In an alternative preferred variant of the invention, the ineffective switchable protective stop is deleted by the protective action independent of the user action to replace the inoperable protective stop. This protection stop is no longer needed because of the replacement for protection against the method in the stop because the self-protection independent stop is activated. This independent protective stop can be positioned at a fixed distance from the stop, since the adjustment position is realigned to this stop.

According to an advantageous development of the invention, a second protective stop, which is assigned to the stop opposite to the blocking in the adjustment path, is set by setting a first protective stop assigned to a first blocking on the basis of this detection of the mechanical blocking. Upon reaching this second protection stop, both protection stops are replaced by protection stops independent of the user action. This is particularly advantageous because a protective stop can already be set without a blockage leading to a loading of the adjusting device. At least with a certain probability, this protective stop can be achieved without a prior blockage, so that the adjustment system recognizes that a sufficient travel path is available. If this second protective stop is not reached in the event of a renewed blocking in the adjustment path, a second protective stop of the current blocking in the adjustment path is again set opposite. Again, there is a certain probability of Achieving this protective stop, which in turn would prevent additional, the adjustment system incriminating blocking. The set protective stop is preferably a protective stop which can be switched ineffectively by a user action, so that temporary obstacles do not lead to a permanent blockage at this protective stop location. In this case, the condition dependent on the adjusting movement is preferably the reaching of the second protective stop. Advantageously, the current blocking in the adjustment opposite protective stop is set with a minimum distance away. The predeterminable or determinable minimum distance extends between the current blocking or the set first protective stop and the opposite protective stop. The minimum distance depends on a desired travel path.

The minimum distance can be determined, for example, in a reorganization or stored for an automotive seat type. The minimum distance is read from a memory. The minimum distance is for example given at the beginning as an empirical value and can be, for example, 80 percent of the desired adjustment or the minimum distance is calculated from undisturbed adjustments in the two stops during tape end assembly of the motor vehicle from the distance of the two stops. If the distance is equal to or less than the minimum distance, the inoperable protective stops are not replaced. However, the ineffective switchable protective stops can be deleted, but in particular also be moved or deactivated.

In order to avoid an overflow of a position counter and to assign the seat memory positions simplified the current adjustment position, the adjustment position is assigned to a position value in a particularly advantageous embodiment of the invention. This position value is changed for assignment depending on the adjustment of the adjusting device, in particular by counting revolutions or angular parts of the revolutions of the drive shaft by means of a magnetic Hall system. Since this assignment, as already explained above by way of example, is error-prone, the position value is preferably corrected when a shift of the position value to the current adjustment position is determined. Such a shift is determined, for example, at a stop when the position value does not coincide with the adjustment position of the stop. Preferably, the current position value is set to this current adjustment position for correction so that the mechanical adjustment axis is aligned with the virtual position value axis.

A preferred embodiment of the embodiment of the invention provides that the position value is corrected when the condition dependent on the adjustment is met. Thus, the probability can be reduced that is aligned by position error or an erroneous assignment of the blockage to a stop, the position value to a faulty adjustment position and these axes are still shifted from each other.

In a further advantageous embodiment of the invention, a Einlembereich assigned to this protective stop is determined in addition to the protective stop. The range limits of this learning range are set depending on the position of the same protection stop or blocking. In the event of a need for correction of the position of the same protective stop, the setting of a new protective stop is permitted if a position value assigned in particular to the new protective stop or blocking lies within this single-range range. Preferably, the region boundaries of the learning region are set when the learning region is assigned to the protection stop independent of the user action.

This assignment between protective stop and teach-in area serves to establish an active relationship between this protective stop and the teach-in area. The Einlembereich controls the local boundary conditions for teaching a new protective stop such that within this training range setting a protective stop is allowed, this newly set protective stop is preferably associated with the respective stop and thus allows in the direction of the stop a reduction of the adjustment. The admission of setting a protective stop means that setting a relevant new protective stop in this area can still depend on further criteria, but takes place locally between the area limits of this learning area, to the exclusion of negative further criteria.

A new protective stop is set if there is a need to correct the value of the previous protective stop, or if no protective stop assigned to this stop has yet been determined. For example, the count relative to the real position of the mechanical stop is substantially shifted, so that the previous position of the protective stop does not ensure a sufficient reduction of Verstellergie before the displaced part touches the stop. If there are expected shifts within the training range limits, the procedure is as described above. Is the position value of the protective stop, the stop or of a value correlating therewith outside of this learning range, preferably an inoperable switchable protective stop is set.

To determine the learning range, the range limits of the learning range are determined as a function of a position characteristic. In particular, this position characteristic is the position of the associated stop itself, so that the limits of the learning range of this position of the stop are easy to calculate and low in tolerance. Alternatively, other positional characteristics may be used. for example, a detection of a certain adjustment position by means of a position detector can be used to calculate the range limits. The width of the Einlembereiches, for example, 20 mm, is calculated in dependence on the position of the stop such that in normal operation of the motor vehicle adjustment a shift between determined position and real adjustment position is generally smaller than the width of the teach-in. The control process can then deviate from this response to larger, unexpected shifts.

In an advantageous embodiment of the invention, a blocking of the adjusting movement is preferably determined at one of the stops for determining the Einlembereiches, and the range limits of Einlembereiches are calculated in dependence on the adjustment position associated with the blocking of the adjustment. Alternatively, a guard stop can also be used for the position calculation. Advantageously, the range limits are calculated such that the blocking position is at or within the range limits.

An advantageous development of the invention provides that the first mechanical stop a first learning area and the second mechanical stop is associated with a second Einlembereich, and between the first Einlembereich and the second teaching area a blocking area is provided. This blocking area, in turn, serves as a local condition dependent on the adjusting movement for setting a protective stop independent of the user action, such that the setting of a protective stop which is independent of the user action and which is associated with the mechanical stop is prevented in the blocking area.

According to an advantageous embodiment of this development of the invention, at least one of the set protective stops, which can be switchable both by the user action, as well as the user action independent protective stops, deactivated when a blocking of the adjustment is determined within the restricted area. The Deactivation causes the previous protective stop can be run over in the direction of the associated mechanical stop, so the adjustment energy is not automatically reduced. However, if a blockage within the teach-in area is recognized later in the following, the protective stop can be reactivated and also repositioned as an ineffective switchable protective stop.

If an adjustment position is determined outside of the previous teach-in areas and the blocking area, in an advantageous development of the invention all teaching-in areas and set protective stops are deactivated. This causes the setting of a new protective stop, which is assigned to a mechanical stop, to be spatially independent, since no learning areas are active. If a blocking is detected, at least one inoperably switchable protective stop is set and the associated learning range is calculated in a computer unit and both stored non-volatilely.

In an advantageous embodiment of the invention, the adjustment speed is reduced at least within the Einlembereiche. If no protective stops are set, the blocking state of the adjustment system at one of the stops takes place with a high probability, which causes a high mechanical load on the adjustment system. To reduce this, the force applied to the stop is substantially reduced by the speed reduction.

As described, in the method, the adjusting device has at least one adjustment path between a first mechanical stop and a second mechanical stop. An adjustment position is determined within the adjustment path. The determination of the adjustment position, for example, by counting pulses that are generated by a displacement sensor.

At a predeterminable distance to one of the mechanical stops, a protective stop is set in the adjustment path, wherein the protective stop, depending on the determined adjustment position, enables an automatic reduction of the adjustment energy for stopping the adjustment movement of the adjustment device in the region of a mechanical blocking of the adjustment movement. The predefinable distance is preferably stored in a memory and can be updated at the storage location in case of need.

In the case of detection of the mechanical blocking, a first protective stop, which can be activated ineffectively by a user action, is set. Such a user action is For example, unlocking the movement in the blocking direction, so that the effect of the ineffective switchable protective stops can be canceled manually by the user, for example.

At the same time or subsequently, a second protective stop, which can be switched ineffective by a user action, is set, which is assigned to the stop opposite to the blocking in the adjustment path and is removed from the first protective stop by a predeterminable or calculated minimum distance. For example, this minimum distance can be defined beforehand. A check of this minimum distance is possible during a normalization run, in that both endpoints of the minimum distance must be approachable. If the travel distance during the check by the reorganization is smaller than the minimum distance, a faulty re-normalization is detected, which is used to control a specific operating mode or to display a fault can. Likewise, the minimum distance can be calculated by measuring the maximum travel distance from the distance between the two stops and subtracting from this maximum travel distance the presettable distances associated with the respective stop.

The first and the second ineffective switchable protective stop can each be replaced by a protective stop independent of this user action, when the adjustment position reaches the position of the second ineffective switchable protective stop. Preferably, the protective stops are then replaced if, in addition, a condition dependent on the adjustment is fulfilled. This condition is, for example, that the adjusting movement between the positions of the two protective stops does not exceed a maximum number of changes of direction. Alternatively, the time between the two protective stops can not exceed a maximum value. If the condition is not fulfilled, further ineffective switchable protective stops are used, which are only replaced when the condition occurs.

The following describes travel states that require certain responses of the control algorithm control algorithm. The reactions in the control method are advantageous embodiments of the invention.

In a first travel state, no or only slight errors have occurred between the mechanical position and the position determined by a control device. Consequently, the adjustment can be adjusted over the travel between the two protective stops. At the protective stops is the adjustment energy, as before described automatically reduced, so that the part to be adjusted is stopped before the respective stop. The stored memory positions are active, so that the adjustment can be adjusted automatically in these memory positions by the user by pressing the corresponding memory button. However, the small errors can add up over the adjustment time to a significant error, so that the travel could be increasingly limited. To counteract this, if an error correction condition is met, at least one of the two protection stops is deactivated and the current position is realigned to a subsequent blockage at one of the stops.

In a second process state, the specific adjustment position is outside the range between the two protective stops, although both protective stops can be active. This may be caused for example by a software error or a jump of the counter due to bit manipulation in the memory. In this case, at least one of the protective stops, preferably both protective stops, is deactivated or deleted. The counter reading of the specific adjustment position is reset to an average value in the middle of the travel path as the default value. The stored memory positions are deactivated or also set to this mean value until one of the stops is reached, the protective stops are activated accordingly, so that the previous memory positions can be reactivated or new memory positions can be activated.

In the third process state, a blockage is detected. This blocking can be detected between the two protective stops or, if these are not activated, outside the area between the two protective stops. Subsequently, the protective stops are deactivated, if this has not already been done. The determined adjustment position is now set to the value assigned to this mechanical stop, so that the protective stops are again in positional relation to the mechanical stops in accordance with the reorganization. Subsequently, the first and the second ineffective switchable protective stop are set. A crossing of these protective stops is possible in the direction of increasing distance from the respective stop. If one of these protective stops is switched ineffective by the user and the adjusting device moves in the direction of blocking, the ineffective switchable protective stop is deactivated if a blockage is not detected at the previous location.

The memory positions remain continuously relative to the positions of the protective stops. These memory positions are not changed with the detection of a blockage, but realigned with the protective stops together with the detected mechanical blocking.

For further details of the control method, reference is made to DE 102 19 284. Furthermore, this control method can be advantageously supplemented by correction methods. Thus, the counts can be weighted according to the determined direction after switching off the motor voltage. Also determined voltage dips and the trailing behavior of the adjustment can be determined to correct.

In the following the invention will be explained in more detail by means of exemplary embodiments with reference to drawings.

Fig. 1

eine schematische Darstellung eines Verstellweges einer Verstelleinrichtung mit Positionsdaten zur Steuerung,

Fig. 1 a

eine schematische Darstellung von verschobenen Positionsdaten,

Fig. 1 b

eine schematische Darstellung von zwei verschobenen Schutzstops,

Fig. 2

eine schematische Darstellung eines weiteren Verstellweges einer Verstelleinrichtung mit Positionsdaten zur Steuerung,

Fig. 2a

eine schematische Darstellung von verschobenen Positionsdaten,

Fig. 2b

eine schematische Darstellung von zwei verschobenen Schutzstops,

Fig. 3a

einen ersten Teil eines schematischen Verfahrensablauf in Form eines Flußdiagramms, und

Fig. 3b

einen zweiten Teil des schematischen Verfahrensablaufs.

Show

Fig. 1

a schematic representation of an adjustment of an adjustment with position data for control,

Fig. 1 a

a schematic representation of shifted position data,

Fig. 1 b

a schematic representation of two shifted protective stops,

Fig. 2

a schematic representation of a further adjustment of an adjustment with position data for control,

Fig. 2a

a schematic representation of shifted position data,

Fig. 2b

a schematic representation of two shifted protective stops,

Fig. 3a

a first part of a schematic process flow in the form of a flow chart, and

Fig. 3b

a second part of the schematic process flow.

In Fig. 1, a displacement VW a motor vehicle seat adjustment is shown schematically. The mechanically possible adjustment path VW extends from a first mechanical stop MA1 (left) to a second mechanical stop MA2 (right). For example, in the present exemplary embodiment, this is a seat-length adjustment, a headrest adjustment or other translatory adjustments. In an analogous manner, the method of control is also applicable to rotational adjustments, such as the adjustment of the inclination of the seat back.

The respective current position of the adjustable part of the adjusting device is determined by an evaluation device, which evaluates the adjustment movement by means of an incremental encoder and an associated sensor in this embodiment. The adjustment path VW is therefore divided into a plurality of increments. In the illustration of FIG. 1, the adjustment path VW extends from the increment with the number 5 to the increment with the number 18. This representation is greatly simplified for illustration purposes. In order to be able to determine the adjustment position with sufficient accuracy, a much larger number of increments, for example tens of thousands of increments, are necessary. The invention is not limited to the use of incremental measuring systems, but also all other absolute and relative position determinations can be advantageously combined with the invention.

In order to reduce the mechanical load on the adjustment system, each mechanical stop MA1 or MA2 is assigned a protective stop SS1 or SS2, also referred to as softstop. These protective stops SS1, SS2 are not to be run over in the direction of the respectively associated mechanical stop MA1 or MA2 without the adjustment energy being reduced in such a way that neither the associated mechanical stop MA1 or MA2 nor the transmission or the motor of the adjusting device is damaged. For this purpose, the motor is preferably braked, so that the adjustment comes to a halt before or on the mechanical stop MA1 or MA2, or that the remaining forces acting on the respective stop MA1 and MA2 forces are small.

On the other hand, in the opposite direction, with increasing distance to the respective mechanical stop MA1 or MA2, the protective stops can be driven over SS1 or SS2. The distance of the protective stops SS1, SS2 to the associated mechanical stop MA1 or MA2 is either fixedly definable, in FIG. 1, for example, an increment, or by a control device in dependence from a parameter, for example, the single-seated weight of the vehicle occupant or the adjustment VW, configurable.

Each mechanical stop MA1 or MA2 is assigned a learning range EB1 or EB2. This learning range EB1 or EB2 has range limits, which are calculated or specified as a function of the associated mechanical stop. In this embodiment, the learning range EB1 of the stop MA1 extends from the increment 4 to the increment 8 and the Einlembereich EB2 from the increment 15 to the increment 20. The range limits and thus the width of the Einlembereichs EB1, EB2 are either fixed and set in fixed positioning the respective mechanical stop MA1 or MA2, or the range limits are reconfigured, for example, depending on the learned parameters or determined parameters or measured variables.

The count values of the evaluation device for determining the position of the adjustable part of the adjusting device can lead to a shift of the determined current position to the real position of the displaced part of the adjusting device by measuring errors, memory errors or other program errors. This is shown by way of example in FIG. 1a. The previously determined protective stop SS2 is therefore located after the shift behind the mechanical stop MA2 (increment 16), ie outside the adjustment path VW. In such a case, at least the protection stop SS2 is reset or updated (SS2 ').

The training areas EB1, EB2 are used to restrict the authorization to set protective stops SS1 or SS2, which are each assigned to a stop MA1, MA2. For evaluation, several variants are conceivable. A first variant provides that the new protective stop SS2 'must be within the learning range EB2, while a second variant provides that a new protective stop SS2' is only allowed if the newly determined position of the mechanical stop MA2 within the range limits of the learning range EB2 is located. In the following, this second variant is presented as an exemplary embodiment.

After installation of the motor vehicle seat in a motor vehicle, the control device for process control in the ground state. The position counter is preset to an initial value, for example 12. Likewise, all protective stop positions and all limits of the learning ranges EB1, EB2 are set to an initial value.

In a first step, the adjustment of the seat are normalized by all adjustment planes are moved once in both mechanical stops MA1, MA2. Upon reaching the respective mechanical stop MA1 or MA2, the associated protective stop position SS1, SS2 is calculated and stored non-volatile in an EEPROM. At a mutual distance around the mechanical stops MA1, MA2, the single-range regions EB1 and EB2 are calculated and stored non-volatilely. For example, the range limits for this purpose are spaced with an incremental value or a percentage value from the position of the mechanical stop MA1, MA2.

The measured path difference between the mechanical stops serves to calculate a minimum distance MD between the protective stops SS1 and SS2, which in turn are stored separately for each adjustment level in a non-volatile manner. To calculate the minimum distance, a predetermined tolerance is included, so that the minimum distance MD preferably corresponds to more than eighty percent of the maximum adjustment path VW.

If the position determined by the position counter is only slightly shifted relative to the real position, this can lead to a mechanical stop MA2 being detected by a block movement within the learning region EB2. In this case, the protection stop SS2 is recalculated and saved non-volatile as the current protection stop SS2 'as shown in FIG. 1a. The old protection stop SS2 is deleted or overwritten simultaneously or following. In addition, the previous single-leg range EB2, as shown in FIG. 1a, is also shifted until the range limits are in the same ratio to the position of the mechanical stop MA2.

If a blocking of the adjustment is determined within the blocking area SB, a setting of a protective stop assigned to one of the mechanical stops MA1, MA2 is not permitted. Such a blockage can be caused for example by a champagne box or another obstacle HN. However, this should not lead to a re-normalization of the seat adjustment, since the setting of a protective stop SS2 would not be associated with the respective stop MA2. An incorrect assignment would lead to the movable path of the adjustment path VW being restricted by this "false" protection stop "SS2 '".

If a blockage due to an obstacle HN or a stop MA1, MA2 within the blocking area SB is determined, this is initially unclear or not detectable for the control device, whether it is merely a temporary obstacle, such as a champagne box or a mechanical stop MA1, MA2 acts. In particular, a significant shift of the position counter, for example due to a runtime error, can lead to an unexpected reaching of a mechanical stop MA1, MA2. To resolve this conflict, both previous protection stops SS1 and SS2 are deleted or deactivated. The previous single-range ranges EB1, EB2 and the minimum distance MD are retained. With a drive into one of the mechanical stops MA1, MA2, the protective stops SS1, SS2 are recalculated when the blocking position is within the learning range EB1, EB2. In this case, the associated single-range range EB1 or EB2 is also recalculated with its range limits.

If the adjustable part of the adjusting device moves outside the adjustment path VW, the motor is stopped at least temporarily. If a position outside of the learning ranges EB1, EB2 in overflows UL1, UL2 is determined, the protective stops SS1, SS2 and the learning ranges EB1, EB2 are cleared or deactivated. The stored minimum distance MD, however, is retained. If blocking is detected in the event of renewed adjustment by a corresponding control, the corresponding protective stop SS1 or SS2 and the associated single-range range EB1 or EB2 are recalculated and stored.

The minimum distance MD of the respective adjustment level is constantly used to check the protective stops SS1 ", SS2" to be set after a detected blocking of the adjustment. The distance between the protective stops SS1 "and SS2" must not be less than the minimum distance MD. Thus, if a protective stop position SS1 "is already set for an adjustment level and the distance between this protective stop position SS1" and the opposite protective stop position SS2 "to be set after a subsequent block recognition is smaller than the minimum distance MD, as in FIG. 1b 2, both protective stops SS1 "and SS2" and the learning ranges EB1 and EB2 are deactivated, for which case it can be concluded that the adjusting path VW is at least partially blocked.

However, the invention is not limited to the aforementioned embodiment. Rather, further embodiments of the invention are conceivable, the approval the setting of the protective stops SS1, SS2 within the Einlembereiche EB1, EB2 link under other constraints than the aforementioned.

In Fig. 2, a displacement VW a motor vehicle seat adjustment is shown schematically. The mechanically possible adjustment path VW extends from a first mechanical stop MA1 (left) to a second mechanical stop MA2 (right). For example, in the present exemplary embodiment, this is a seat-length adjustment, a headrest adjustment or other translatory adjustments. In an analogous manner, the method of control is also applicable to rotational adjustments, such as the adjustment of the inclination of the seat back.

The respective current position of the adjustable part of the adjusting device is determined by an evaluation device, which evaluates the adjustment movement by means of an incremental encoder and an associated sensor in this embodiment. The adjustment path VW is therefore subdivided into a plurality of increments. In the illustration of FIG. 2, the adjustment path VW extends from the increment with the number 5 to the increment with the number 18. This representation is greatly simplified for illustration purposes. In order to be able to determine the adjustment position with sufficient accuracy, a much larger number of increments, for example tens of thousands of increments, is necessary. The invention is not limited to the use of incremental measuring systems, but also all other absolute and relative position determinations can be advantageously combined with the invention.

In order to reduce the mechanical load on the adjustment system, each mechanical stop MA1 or MA2 is assigned a protective stop SS1 or SS2, also referred to as softstop. These protective stops SS1, SS2 are not to be run over in the direction of the respectively associated mechanical stop MA1 or MA2 without the adjustment energy being reduced in such a way that neither the associated mechanical stop MA1 or MA2 nor the transmission or the motor of the adjusting device is damaged. The protective stop SS1, SS2 consequently leads, depending on the determined adjustment position, to an automatic reduction of the adjustment energy until the adjustment movement of the adjustment device is stopped in the region of the mechanical blocking of the adjustment movement. For this purpose, the motor is preferably braked, so that the adjusting movement comes to a halt before or at the mechanical stop MA1 or MA2 or any other obstacle, or that the remaining on the respective stop MA1 or MA2 or the obstacle HN2 acting forces are low or do not occur.

In the opposite direction, with increasing distance to the respective mechanical stop MA1 or MA2, the protective stops SS1, SS2, however, are traversable. The distance of the protective stops SS1, SS2 to the associated mechanical stop MA1 or MA2 is either fixed predetermined, in Fig. 2, for example, an increment, or by a control device in dependence on a parameter, for example, the single-seated weight of the vehicle occupant or the adjustment VW, configurable.

If the motor vehicle seat moved from the stop MA1 in the direction of the stop MA2 encounters an obstacle HN2, which is, for example, a banana box placed between the motor vehicle seat and the rear seat, the adjusting device is blocked at this adjusting position (HN2). Since a distinction between the mechanical stop MA2 and the banana box HN2 is not readily possible, the adjustment system must make a decision that protects the mechanism from the loads of numerous blocks without permanently restricting the possible travel path VW. For this purpose, an ineffective switchable protective stop WSS2 is set at the adjustment position 13 at a distance from the banana box at the adjustment position 14. The distance allows a reduction of the adjustment, so that the motor vehicle seat stops before reaching the banana box HN2, this should be adjusted starting from an adjustment smaller than the increment 13 again in the direction of the banana box HN2.

If the banana box HN2 is removed from the intermediate space between the motor vehicle seat and the rear bench, and if the user of the motor vehicle seat wishes to adjust this beyond the adjustment position 13 in the direction of the mechanical stop MA2, this will of the user must be determined by the adjustment system. If, for this purpose, the key for the adjustment in the same direction is actuated again at the adjustment position 13 after stopping the adjusting movement, the protective stop WSS2 is overpressed so that its effect is switched off. The seat can then be moved to the mechanical stop MA2.

In the embodiment of FIG. 2, each mechanical stop MA1 or MA2 is assigned a learning range EB1 or EB2. This learning range EB1 or EB2 has range limits that depend on the associated mechanical stop MA1, or MA2 calculated or specified. In this embodiment, the Einlembereich EB1 of the stop MA1 from the increment 4 to the increment 8 and the Einlembereich EB2 ranges from the increment 15 to the increment 20. The range limits and thus the width of the Einlembereichs EB1, EB2 are either fixed and set to fixed positioning the respective mechanical stop MA1, or MA2, or the range limits are reconfigured, for example, depending on learned parameters or determined parameters or measured variables.

The count values of the evaluation device for determining the position of the adjustable part of the adjusting device can lead to a shift of the determined current position to the real position of the displaced part of the adjusting device by measuring errors, memory errors or other program errors. This is shown by way of example in FIG. 2a. The previously determined protective stop SS2 is therefore located after the shift behind the mechanical stop MA2 (increment 16), ie outside the adjustment path VW. In such a case, at least the protection stop SS2 is reset or updated. For this purpose, an ineffective switchable protective stop WSS2 'is initially set, which is replaced by a permanent protective stop SS2' which is independent of the overpressure, if the adjusting system recognizes the mechanical stop MA2 as such because of a fulfilled condition of a plausibility check.

The training areas EB1, EB2 are used to restrict the authorization to set protective stops SS1 or SS2, which can each be assigned to a stop MA1, MA2. For evaluation, several variants are conceivable. A first variant provides that the newly set protective stop SS2 'must be within the Einlembereiches EB2, while a second variant provides that a new protective stop SS2' is only allowed if the newly determined position of the mechanical stop MA2 within the range limits of the learning range EB2 is located. In the following, this second variant is presented as an exemplary embodiment.

After installation of the motor vehicle seat in a motor vehicle, the control device for process control in the ground state. The position counter is preset to an initial value, for example 12. Likewise, all protective stop positions and all limits of the Einlembereiche EB1, EB2 are set to an initial value.

In a first step, the adjustment of the seat are normalized by all adjustment planes are moved once in both mechanical stops MA1, MA2. Upon reaching the respective mechanical stop MA1 or MA2, the associated protective stop position SS1, SS2 is calculated and stored non-volatile in an EEPROM. At a mutual distance around the mechanical stops MA1, MA2, the single-range regions EB1 and EB2 are calculated and stored non-volatilely. For example, the range limits for this purpose are spaced with an incremental value or a percentage value from the position of the mechanical stop MA1, MA2.

The measured path difference between the mechanical stops MA1 and MA2 is used to calculate a minimum distance MD between the protective stops SS1 and SS2, which in turn are stored separately non-volatilely for each adjustment level. To calculate the minimum distance, a predetermined tolerance is included, so that the minimum distance MD preferably corresponds to more than eighty percent of the maximum adjustment path VW.

If the position determined by the position counter is only slightly shifted relative to the real position, this can lead to a mechanical stop MA2 being detected by a block movement within the learning region EB2. In this case, the protective stop SS2 is recalculated and set as ineffective switchable protective stop WSS2 ', as shown in Fig. 2a, and stored non-volatile. The old protection stop SS2 is deactivated simultaneously or following. Now it is determined by means of the plausibility check whether the condition is fulfilled which ensures that it is the mechanical stop MA2. Subsequently, the ineffective switchable protective stop WSS2 'is replaced by the permanent, user-independent protection stop SS2'. Thereafter, the previous teach-in range EB2, as shown in FIG. 2a, is shifted until the range limits are in the same ratio to the position of the mechanical stop MA2, as before for the preceding protective stop SS2.

If a blocking of the adjustment is determined within the blocking area SB, a setting of a protective stop assigned to one of the mechanical stops MA1, MA2 is not permitted. Only one of these blocking (HN2) assigned ineffective switchable protective stop WSS2 is allowed. Such a blockage (HN2) may be caused, for example, by the aforementioned banana box or other obstacle HN2. However, this should not lead to a re-normalization of the seat adjustment, since the setting of a protective stop SS2 is not the respective one Stop MA2 would be assigned. An incorrect assignment would lead to the movable path of the adjustment path VW being restricted by this "false" guard stop.

If a blockage due to an obstacle HN2 or a stop MA1, MA2 is determined within the blocking area SB, the control device is initially unclear, or not detectable, whether it is merely a temporary obstacle HN2, such as a banana box HN2 or a mechanical stop MA1 , MA2 acts. In particular, a significant shift of the position counter, for example due to a runtime error, can lead to an unexpected reaching of a mechanical stop MA1, MA2. In order to resolve this conflict, both previous protection stops SS1 and SS2 that are independent of user actions are deleted or preferably deactivated. The previous single-range ranges EB1, EB2 and the minimum distance MD are retained. With a drive into one of the detected mechanical stops MA1, MA2, the protective stops SS1, SS2 are recalculated when the blocking position is within the learning range EB1, EB2. In this case, the associated learning range EB1 or EB2 is also recalculated with its range limits.

If the adjustable part of the adjusting device moves outside the adjustment path VW, the motor is stopped at least temporarily. If a position outside of the learning regions EB1, EB2 is determined in overflows UL1, UL2, the protective stops SS1, SS2 and the learning regions EB1, EB2 are cleared or deactivated. The stored minimum distance MD, however, is retained. If a blockage is detected during a renewed adjustment by a corresponding control, the ineffective switchable protective stop WSS2 'is set and this is conditionally replaced by the independent protective stop SS2 (or SS1) and the associated single-arm range EB2 or EB1 is in particular recalculated and stored.

The minimum distance MD of the respective adjustment level is constantly used for checking the protective stops WSS1 ", WSS2" to be set after a detected blocking of the adjustment. The distance between the protective stops WSS1 "and WSS2" must not be less than the minimum distance MD. Thus, if for an adjustment plane already a protective stop position WSS1 "is set and the distance between this protective stop position WSS1" and to be set after a subsequent block detection opposite protective stop position WSS2 "is smaller than the minimum distance MD, as in Fig. 2b shown schematically, both protective stops WSS1 "and WSS2" is not replaced by protection actions SS1 "and SS2" independent of the user action, and the learning areas EB1 and EB2 are deactivated. For this case, it can be concluded that the adjustment VW is at least partially blocked in particular by an object or the like. The condition is therefore not fulfilled.

FIGS. 3a and 3b schematically show a process flow in the form of a flow chart. The left-hand part of the method shown in FIG. 3a relates to a first-time blockage at block 1, the second part of the method shown in FIG. 3b relates analogously to a first-time blockage at the opposite second block 2 Blocks 1, 2 can be stops MA1, MA2 or other types of blocks, such as obstacles HN1, HN2. In the following, only the method sequence for block 1 will be described, since the second part of the method is mirror-image in terms of functionality. The single-range ranges mentioned above in the exemplary embodiment are not required in this exemplary embodiment of FIGS. 3 a and 3b, but can advantageously be combined. In addition, the user stops independent protective stops SS1 and SS2 remain at a fixed adjustment position, wherein the determined position value I is normalized if necessary.

After a Umormierung at the end of the tape production process of the motor vehicle, the adjusting device is moved in the process state 1 by the user. At the same time, the adjustment stops at the protective stops SS1 and SS2, which are independent of user actions. If a block 1 is detected in the direction of the mechanical stop MA1, this being a hindrance HN1 or the mechanical stop MA1 virtually displaced by position error, the protective stops SS1 and SS2 which are independent of user actions are deactivated, but remain with the assigned position still saved.

Subsequently, an ineffective switchable protective stop WSS1 is set at a distance from the blocking block 1 in the adjustment path VW, and a counter for load or direction change is set to zero. Thereafter, an adjustment in the process state 2 take place, in which the user actions independent protective stops SS1 and SS2 continue to be disabled, that are inactive and the ineffective switchable protection stop WSS1 allows protection against a procedure in the block 1. In addition, the load or direction changes are counted. This process state 2 is terminated when one of the following events occurs.

First, a block 1 is again detected in the direction of the mechanical stop MA1, which must therefore be detected before the previous block 1 in the adjustment VW, otherwise the adjustment is stopped at the ineffective switchable protective stop WSS1. This new block 1 in turn leads to a renewed setting of a new ineffective switchable protective stop WSS1, the old ineffective switchable protective stop WSS1 is deleted or overwritten.

Secondly, upon reaching the ineffective switchable protective stop WSS1, a guard stop counter value C1 is increased by one counter. If this count value exceeds the threshold value 3, the ineffective switchable protective stop WSS1 is deleted and the method changes to the process state 4.

Thirdly, in the event of an overshoot Ü of the protective stop WSS1, which causes a switching of the protective stop WSS1 into an ineffective state, the ineffective switchable protective stop WSS1 is thereby or subsequently deleted, and the method transitions into the process state 4.

In method state 4, the protection stops SS1 and SS2 which are independent of user actions are furthermore deactivated and the ineffective switchable protective stops WSS1, WSS2 are deleted. If a block 1 is detected in the direction of the stop MA1, an ineffective switchable protective stop WSS1 is set and subsequently proceeded in process state 2. If, on the other hand, a block 2 is detected in the direction of the stop MA2, an ineffective switchable protective stop WSS2 is set and subsequently proceeded in the process state 3 (FIG. 3b).

Fourth, in the process state 2 with set, ineffective switchable protective stops WSS1, a blocking block 2 in the direction of the stop MA2 is detected. This may again be an obstacle HN2 or the mechanical stop MA2. First of all, this blocking block 2 is assigned an ineffective switchable protective stop WSS2.

Subsequently, a condition Bed is checked. If the condition is fulfilled, the method is continued in method state 1. Otherwise, if the condition Bed is not met, the ineffective switchable protective stop WSS1 assigned to the mechanical stop MA1 is deleted and the process continues in the following in process state 3 (FIG. 3b).

This condition Bed consists in this embodiment of the plausibility check that the distance between the two ineffective switchable protective stops WSS1 and WSS2 is greater than or equal to a minimum distance MD and at the same time only a few load changes between the two blocks Block 1 and Block 2. The load changes are in an immediate causal relationship with certain position errors of the adjustment system, wherein the determined position value I can differ significantly from the real position of the adjustment. If these two sub-conditions of the required accuracy of the adjustment and the minimum distance met, subsequently the position value I is re-normalized at the current adjustment position on the mechanical stop MA2, independent of user actions protective stops SS1 and SS2 are activated and the two ineffective switchable protective stops WSS1 and WSS2 deleted. Subsequently, as already mentioned, proceed in method state 1.

However, the invention is not limited to the aforementioned embodiments. On the contrary, further embodiments according to the invention are conceivable which combine replacement of an inoperably switchable protective stop by a protective stop independent of the user action under different boundary conditions than those mentioned above.

For controlling a control device of the adjusting device is provided which has a measuring unit and a computing unit. By means of the measuring unit, an electrical signal dependent on the adjusting movement is generated, which serves to determine an adjustment position within an adjusting path between a first stop and a second stop. The evaluation of this signal is carried out by the arithmetic unit, preferably a microcontroller. Furthermore, this microcontroller has control functions which make it possible to set an ineffective switchable by a user action protective stops in the adjustment when a mechanical blockage by a detector, which may consist of the measuring unit and the microcontroller is detected. Furthermore, the microcontroller has computing means to replace the ineffective switchable protective stop by an independent of this user action protective stop, if the condition dependent on the adjustment movement is met. Also, the dependence of this condition can be determined by this control device from the arithmetic unit and the measuring unit.

Claims (65)

1. Method for controlling an adjuster on a motor vehicle, more particularly a vehicle seat adjuster which has at least one adjusting path between a first stop and a second stop wherein

   - an adjustment position of the adjuster can be set within an adjusting path through a user action;

   - the relevant adjustment position within the adjusting path is determined and

   - a protective stop is set in the adjusting path which in dependence on the adjustment position triggers a reduction in the adjusting energy more particularly for stopping the adjusting movement in the region of a mechanical block of the adjusting movement,

   characterised in that
   in order to correct the position of the protective stop a new protective stop which cannot be switched through user action is set when a condition dependent on the adjusting path of the adjuster is fulfilled.
2. Method according to claim 1, characterised in that the protective stop can be switched without user action through an evaluator logic which evaluates the individual adjusting events of the adjusting movement.
3. Method according to claim 2, characterised in that switching the protective stop without user action is carried out on the basis of the evaluation of the history of the adjusting events.
4. Method according to one of the preceding claims, characterised in that as adjusting events of the adjusting movement are evaluated those events which cause a stopping of the adjusting movement.
5. Method according to one of the preceding claims, characterised in that as adjusting events of the adjusting movement are evaluated those events which correspond to a start of an adjusting movement, and/or those adjusting events which correspond to a direction change of the adjusting movement.
6. Method according to one of the preceding claims, characterised in that as conditions dependent on the adjusting movement are used the location, time and/or number of individual adjusting events of the adjusting movement.
7. Method according to one of the preceding claims for stopping the adjusting movement of the adjusting device in the region of a mechanical block of the adjusting movement, more particularly for stopping the adjusting movement of the adjusting device in the region of the protective stop characterised in that in addition to the setting of the protective stop a learning region assigned to this protective stop is determined in that the range limits of the learning region are determined in dependence on a position characteristic, more particularly on the position of at least one of the stops, and in the event of a need for correction of the position of this protective stop the setting of a new protective stop is permitted if a position value associated in particular with the new protective stop or the associated mechanical stop lies within this learning region.
8. Method according to claim 7 characterised in that to determine the learning region a blocking of the adjusting movement at one of the stops is determined and the range limits of the learning region are calculated in dependence on the adjustment position associated with blocking the adjusting movement.
9. Method according to claim 8, characterised in that the range limits are calculated so that the blocking position lies on or within the range limits.
10. Method according to one of claims 7 and 9, characterised in that the first mechanical stop is assigned a first learning region and the second mechanical stop is assigned a second learning region, and between the first learning region and the second learning region is a locking region whereby in the locking region the setting of a new protective stop associated with one of the mechanical stops is prevented.
11. Method according to claim 10, characterised in that at least one of the set protective stops is deactivated if a blocking of the adjusting movement is determined within the locking region.
12. Method according to one of claims 8 or 11, characterised in that learning regions and set protective stops are deactivated if an adjusting position is determined outside of the hitherto learning regions and locking region.
13. Method according to one of claims 10 to 12, characterised in that the distance between a first protective stop of the first mechanical stop and a second protective stop of the second mechanical stop is compared with a minimum distance and at least the one of the protective stops is changed if the distance is equal to or less than the minimum distance.
14. Method according to claim 13, characterised in that both protective stops and the associated learning regions are deactivated if the distance is equal to or less than the minimum distance.
15. Method according to one of claims 13 or 14 characterised in that the minimum distance is provided for an adjusting device and is read off for the comparison from a non-volatile memory.
16. Method according to one of claims 14 to 15, characterised in that the minimum distance is calculated from a measured maximum adjusting path.
17. Method according to one of claims 7 to 16, characterised in that the adjusting speed is reduced at least inside the learning regions.
18. Method according to one of claims 7 to 17, characterised in that protective stops and learning regions are calculated in a computer unit and then stored in a non-volatile memory.
19. Method according to one of claims 7 to 18, characterised in that a second position of the second protective stop assigned to the second mechanical stop is determined in dependence on the determination of a first position of the first protective stop associated with the first mechanical stop.
20. Method according to claim 19, characterised in that in the event of a need for correcting the position of one of the protective stops

    - the error in the position of this protective stop is established,

    - the desired position of this protective stop is determined and the stop corrected and

    - the position of the other protective stop assigned to the other stop is then determined and corrected in dependence on this actual position.
21. Method according to claim 19, characterised in that the adjusting position is assigned to a position value which is changed for the assignment in dependence on the adjustment of the adjuster, the position value is corrected when a displacement of the position value relative to the actual adjusted position is established, and for correction the actual position value is set with a relative position change to the position of at least one stop to this actual adjusted position.
22. Method according to claims 19 and 21, characterised in that for the correction the actual position value is set to this actual adjusted position whereby this position value is changed relative to the positions of the first protective stop and second protective stop which are dependent on each other.
23. Method according to one of claims 21 or 22, characterised in that to assign the adjustment position to the position value the position value is a numerical value which is incremented or decremented in dependence on the drive movement of a drive of the adjusting device.
24. Method according to one of claims 21 to 23, characterised in that the position of the first protective stop and the position of the second protective stop are stored as values invariable for correction.
25. Method according to one of claims 21 to 24, characterised in that the correction of the position value is calculated in dependence on an adjusted position relevant for blocking the adjusting movement so that the first protective stop is positioned in the region of the first mechanical stop and the second protective stop is positioned in the region of the second mechanical stop.
26. Method according to one of claims 21 to 25, characterised in that at least one of the protective stops is deactivated when a displacement of the position value relative to the actual mechanical adjusted position in the adjustment path is established.
27. Method according to one of claims 19 to 26, characterised in that the first protective stop and the second protective stop are arranged positioned dependent on each other by a predeterminable or detectable minimum distance.
28. Method according to one of claims 19 to 27, characterised in that the adjustment path is represented on a virtual position axis, the position of the first protective stop and the position of the second protective stop dependent on the first protective stop are arranged fixed on this virtual position axis, the actual adjusted position is assigned to a position value on the virtual position axis, and this virtual position axis is aligned relative to the adjusting path when a displacement of the virtual position towards the adjustment path is detected.
29. Method according to claim 28, characterised in that the displacement of the position axis relative to the adjustment path is calculated in dependence on an adjusted position relevant to the blocking of the adjusting movement, so that the first protective stop is positioned in the region of the first mechanical stop and the second protective stop is positioned in the region of the second mechanical stop.
30. Method according to one of claims 28 or 29, characterised in that at least one of the protective stops is deactivated if a displacement of the virtual position axis relative to the adjustment path is detected.
31. Method according to one of claims 19 to 30, characterised in that at least one of the protective stops is deactivated at least temporarily when after a stopping of the adjusting movement conditioned by the protective stop the adjuster is driven again once or several times into the preceding adjusting direction.
32. Method according to one of the claims 19 to 31, characterised in that at least one of the protective stops is deactivated at least temporarily when a predetermined number of adjustments of the adjusting device is reached.
33. Method according to one of claims 19 to 32, characterised in that the first mechanical stop is assigned a first learning region and the second mechanical stop is assigned a second learning region, between the first learning region and the second learning region a locking region is provided, and at least one of the protective stops is deactivated when a blocking of the adjusting movement is determined inside the locking region.
34. Method according to one of the preceding claims, characterised in that in the event of detection of a mechanical blocking a protective stop which can be switched without force through user action, is set and the protective stop which can be switched without force is replaced by a protective stop which is independent of this user action when a condition dependent on the adjusting movement is fulfilled.
35. Method according to claim 34, characterised in that the condition is dependent on an adjusting movement into one of the stops.
36. Method according to claim 35, characterised in that the position of the stop opposed to the blocking in the adjustment path is established as condition.
37. Method according to claim 35, characterised in that the opposed stop is determined from a minimum distance between the two blockings.
38. Method according to one of claims 35 to 37, characterised in that the path of an adjustment parameter is evaluated for the blocking and as condition this path is assigned to a path of the adjustment parameter which is characteristic for a stop.
39. Method according to one of claims 34 to 38, characterised in that the blocking on one of the stops is sensed as condition.
40. Method according to one of claims 34 to 39, characterised in that the deviation in the specific adjustment position is established and as condition the deviation meets a criterion, more particularly does not exceed a maximum value.
41. Method according to claim 40, characterised in that the deviation is determined through a number of adjustments, and as condition the number of the adjustments does not exceed a maximum number.
42. Method according to one of claims 40 to 42, characterised in that the deviation is determined through a number of direction changes of the adjustment, and as condition the number of direction changes of the adjustment does not exceed a maximum value.
43. Method according to one of claims 40 to 42, characterised in that the deviation is established through determining a detected break in the supply voltage of the adjusting device, and as condition the break in the supply voltage is not detected during an adjustment.
44. Method according to one of claims 34 to 43, characterised in that as condition an adjustment position independent of the blocking is sensed in the adjustment path between the stops.
45. Method according to one of claims 34 to 44, characterised in that by means of an anti jam detector a jamming of objects and/or persons by the adjusting device on the motor vehicle is detected, and as condition prior to replacement no jamming has been detected.
46. Method according to one of claims 34 to 45, characterised in that the adjusting device is operated in a calibration mode, and as condition in this calibration mode the blocking takes place at the stops.
47. Method according to one of claims 34 to 46, characterised in that the user action is undertaken by manually actuating an operating device for controlling the adjusting device.
48. Method according to claim 47, characterised in that the user action is undertaken by a repeat manual actuation of the actuation element of the operating device associated with the adjusting movement direction after setting the protective stop which can be switched without force.
49. Method according to claim 48, characterised in that the user action is undertaken by manually actuating an (additional) release actuating element.
50. Method according to one of claims 34 to 49, characterised in that the user action is undertaken interactively by means of an input unit and an output unit between the adjusting device and the user.
51. Method according to one of claims 34 to 50 characterised in that for replacing the switchable protective stop switchable without force through the protective stop which is independent of the user action, this protective stop is changed from a protective stop which can be switched without force to the protective stop independent of the user action.
52. Method according to one of claims 34 to 51, characterised in that for replacing the switchable protective stop switchable without force by the protective stop independent of user action the protective stop switchable without force is cancelled and the protective stop independent of the user action is activated.
53. Method according to one of claims 34 to 52, characterised in that by setting the (first) protective stop as a result of the detection of the mechanical blocking a second protective stop is set which is assigned to the stop opposite the blocking in the adjustment path, and on reaching this second protective stop both protective stops are replaced by the protective stop independent of the user action.
54. Method according to claim 53 characterised in that in the event of not reaching this second protective stop in the event of a new blocking a second protective stop is set anew opposite the actual blocking in the adjustment path.
55. Method according to one of claims 53 or 54, characterised in that the set protective stop is a protective stop which can be switched without force through user action whereby the condition dependent on the adjusting movement is the reaching of the second protective stop.
56. Method according to one of claims 53 to 55, characterised in that the second protective stop is set a predeterminable or detectable minimum distance in the adjustment path away from the blocking or the set first protective stop whereby the minimum distance is dependent on the desired travel path.
57. Method according to one of claims 34 to 56, characterised in that the adjustment position is assigned to a position value which is changed for assignment in dependence on the displacement of the adjustment device , the position value is corrected when a displacement of the position value is established for the actual position, and for correction the actual position value is set to this actual adjusted position.
58. Method according to claim 57, characterised in that the position value is corrected when the condition dependent on the adjustment movement is fulfilled.
59. Method according to one of claims 34 to 58, characterised in that in addition to the protective stop a learning region assigned to this protective stop is determined whose range limits are set in dependence on the position of the same protective stop, and in the event of a need for correcting the position of the same protective stop the setting of a new protective stop is permitted if a position value assigned in particular to the new protective stop or blocking lies within this learning region.
60. Method according to claim 59, characterised in that the range limits of the learning region are set when the learning region is assigned to the protective stop independent of the user action.
61. Method according to one of claims 7 to 60, characterised in that in the event of a detection of a mechanical blocking a first protective stop which can be switched without force through user action is set, a second protective stop switchable without force through user action is set which is assigned to that of the stop opposite the locking in the adjustment path and is removed from the first protective stop by a predeterminable or calculated minimum distance, and the first and second protective stops which are switchable without force can each be replaced by a protective stop independent of this user action, when the adjusted position reaches the position of the second protective stop which can be switched without force.
62. Method according to claim 61, characterised in that one or more memory positions which serve for automatically moving the adjusting device into these memory positions are set in relation to the protective stops and in the event of blocking are updated with the new setting of the protective stop.
63. Method according to one of claims 61 or 62, characterised in that in the event of an adjusted position outside of the region between the first protective stop and second protective stop the protective stop independent of user action or the protective stops switchable without force through a user action are deactivated and the adjusted position is set to a value between the two protective stop positions.
64. Method according to claims 62 and 63, characterised in that the memory positions in this case are deactivated or set to the updated value of the adjusted position.
65. Method according to one of claims 61 to 64, characterised in that the minimum distance is calculated from the spacing of the stops during an original calibration.

Images